F-16 technologic information

[Gryphon]

As the USAF found out in the Balkans, Stealth can be defeated (one F-117 was toasted). Stealth airframes/planforms are relatively static through the life of the aircraft, while radars and electronic detection systems are constantly being updated.

Stealth isn't an invisibility shield, enough power and an enemy can burn through it. While the F-22's RCS is quite tiny, there remains the possibility if not probability that clever enemy electronics manufacturers could devise airborne systems to marginalize this advantage.

The F-22 has much more going for it than just stealth though. With those massive engines independently vectored to 20 degrees (+/-), the power and agility of the Raptor makes it a potent fighter even if it was painted chrome and powered up a radar transponder.

Previous generation planes can engage the F-22, but not well and will always be at a severe disadvantage. However, the edge will shrink as enemies counter with steadily improving radars and IR detection systems.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I do not mean winning in exactly 1 vs 1 mode. I just want to ask if it is possible that F22 could be shot down.

Any plane can get shot down.

The issue is how many opportunities are able to be managed by not only the target - but also by accompanying systems.

Its about systems and training as well as platforms.

 

[gf0012-aust]

To you I only wanted to make clear what I meant with "us".

Because you replied this to my post:


So no harm done, just a small missunderstanding.

cheers

In an oblique fashion, we (as in NATO and affiliates) do have some Mig29's. I have an associate who has one static parked outside of his office. Its one of the squadron that the US bought from Moldavia many moons ago.

On another note. Germany sold the Mig-29's for the princely transfer fee of 1 Euro to Poland.

I interviewed a Frontal Aviation mechanic in the late 90's who wanted to emigrate to Australia. We ended up finding him a job with BAE who then promptly shipped him off to the west coast of the USA. He was one happy camper, he'd arrived with the equiv of $120 for he and his family and ended up with a job within 48hrs and $37k PA (which in 1997 was a bucket load of money).

He hated the Fulcrum but loved the Frogfoot and Mig23.

 

[Big-E]

As the USAF found out in the Balkans, Stealth can be defeated (one F-117 was toasted). Stealth airframes/planforms are relatively static through the life of the aircraft, while radars and electronic detection systems are constantly being updated.

The F-117 scenerio was one that placed all the cards in the hands of the defender and did not play to the strengths of the aircraft. Running the same strike route evening after evening is not my idea of being picked up on radar. The Serb missile officer was competent and used triangulation of flight path to launch a salvo that did the job. He was taking an educated guess at where the plane would be and he got lucky.

Stealth isn't an invisibility shield, enough power and an enemy can burn through it. While the F-22's RCS is quite tiny, there remains the possibility if not probability that clever enemy electronics manufacturers could devise airborne systems to marginalize this advantage.

Just pouring power into a radar is not going to make a stealthy RCS become more apparent. It's RCS won't increase just because you put more power into your signal. When you increase power output you must have better software alogrithms that can sort through the clutter to give you possible contacts otherwise every butterfly, bumble bee, and bird would come up as bogeys. The biggest thing power output does is increase range.

Previous generation planes can engage the F-22, but not well and will always be at a severe disadvantage. However, the edge will shrink as enemies counter with steadily improving radars and IR detection systems.

I haven't seen the plane yet that can take the Raptor. Improving your radar is not the wave of the future of stealth detection. Only a system like JORNS just happens to hit a vulernable spot that was not thought possible by engineers but it is unrealable and will be taken into consideration in future models. I don't know how much more sensitive IR seeker heads can get... do you?

 

[Rich]

When I said this,


I didn't mean US (United States) but just us because I am german.
Ok, sold might be a too big word for the 1€ deal we did with Poland.

And when did I stated that the MiG-29 is an überplane?
I just stated that it was a good plane when it comes to WVR engagements.
I also said that it sucked at BVR.
And yeah it was not easy to maintain and expensive to operate. Loiter time was also not that good, etc.

And I thought you wanted to ignore me Rich.

For the record you never said it was an "uber" whatever. I was going to respond to what you said, then all of a sudden I had to leave, and left your quote up in my post.

I don't remember saying I wanted to put you on ignore, "tho its a thought". What post was that? Or, lets just get back to airplanes. The point I was making was that our defense people have cried "wolf" so many times its hard to believe anything they say.

Most of all now, with Hillary et all waiting at the gates, and with a potential new administration being Democrat, defense wants to grab all it can, with both hands, while it can. When I read news releases regarding defense systems "cynicism" is my first reaction. When I first heard about this IAF adventure my first thought was "this is a scam".

Mouse, amazing how your English and grammar has improved since your first posts. Compare this

Hi, everyone. I am new here.

I came from China, Where most dude would like to portray the U.S. and Japan as the ultimate satan of the universe on the internet. But privately most of the younger generation would be more willing to see a Sino - US - EU Alliance keeping the world order. In fact, most of the population consider U.S. as the country's best friends, if the U.S. would leave Taiwan alone. Since discuss such an alliance on a Chinese Forum would cause me to be bombard with all kinds of hell, may be even life threats, as I was a traitor of the nation, therefore, I come here and wish to here more from the crowds worldwide.

To this

Don't you feel my name is a common one?
Anyway it's nice to meet you.

Now, back to the topic, is it possible for F18E/F or F16C/D to engage F22?
Can an upgrade on the radar or other systems do the trick?
I do not mean winning in exactly 1 vs 1 mode. I just want to ask if it is possible that F22 could be shot down.

Waiting for more experts

In case your wondering why I don't answer you from now on its because I have you on ignore. I don't talk to people who have been kicked off the forum and then return trying to make us all look like fools while playing a foreigner.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I don't talk to people who have been kicked off the forum and then return trying to make us all look like fools while playing a foreigner.

You might be a tad wrong on this issue. Mouse has a unique IP address (as in it hasn't been used by anyone else stored in the forums register)

So unless Web knows another way to validate repeat offenders, Mouse does appear to be legit.

Either way, if you have concerns about poster legitimacy then PM mods or web offline rather than have it enjoy oxygen on here.

thx in adv

 

[Waylander]

@gf-aust
Ahem, I wrote this:

I didn't mean US (United States) but just us because I am german.
Ok, sold might be a too big word for the 1€ deal we did with Poland.

:

 

[gf0012-aust]

@gf-aust
Ahem, I wrote this:


:

yeah mate, i noticed after i posted and hoped you wouldn't notice it.

 

[Gryphon]

Big-E wrote:

Just pouring power into a radar is not going to make a stealthy RCS become more apparent. It's RCS won't increase just because you put more power into your signal. When you increase power output you must have better software alogrithms that can sort through the clutter to give you possible contacts otherwise every butterfly, bumble bee, and bird would come up as bogeys. The biggest thing power output does is increase range.

Reducing the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is the essence of Stealth. The F-22's RCS is very, very small - especially when compared to other previous generation fighters. But, that figure is not zero, it has a cross section there is something for radar to see from any angle, not much - but something. Since the quantity isn't zero, increasing the power of an illuminating radar will indeed assist detection. Power doesn't mean range, I realize it is more complicated than that, but more power does help.

When the F-117 was downed in the Balkans, the AAA commander was creative and the USAF had become complacent == one downed expensive Stealth Fighter. This was precisely my poorly worded point. Stealth is not an invisibility shield, creative enemies and sloppy tactics result in unforeseen vulnerabilities.

Back during the Cold War, the Russians maintained a series of acoustical detectors around probable paths of incoming NATO bombers and cruise missiles - called them "The Big Ear". I have heard they were capable enough to direct AAA fire.

It is impossible to predict technological breakthroughs. Yet, I find it easy to believe some emergent technology will eventually compromise stealth. Evidently the USAF thinks in a similar fashion, evidence - if the Raptor's stealth is immune to advances in radar then why invest so much development in making it super agile, super fast, a super fighter even without stealth? If the USAF's stealth technology was/is so "super", the F-22 could have been designed as a missile truck (a la Mig-25), a big, fast, stealthy flying missile farm.

 

[Death6]

Back to f-16 chances guys does a modernizated f-16 c/d blok 52 have a chance against f-22 or somewhat other fighters???



Admin Edit: Stop with this bs. It does not work this way... 100 F-16 from one side and 200 F-22s from the other side, who wins? That is childish stuff and please don't post such "scenarios" anymore!

 

[Scott]

Yes, any plane can get shot down. In addition, systems can fail, pilots/controllers can make errors, etc.

The odds against an F-16 (even several) killing an F-22A are very remote, but not impossible. My money is on the F-22A, even at a 1-10 disadvantage. The F-22A is faster, more maneuverable, has a very low RCS plus stealth, and even unarmed it would probably evade an F-16.

According to the USAF, "The sophisticated F-22A aerodesign, advanced flight controls, thrust vectoring, and high thrust-to-weight ratio provide the capability to outmaneuver all current and projected aircraft."

That may be exaggerated, they aren't likely to admit any flaws in their billion dollar baby, but there are also features they haven't publicized yet.

Is it possible that new technologies will minimize or eliminate F-22A's steath capabilities-sure. But even if you find it, you have to catch it and kill it before it kills you.

Other critical points about the F-117A that was shot down. It's a subsonic aircraft (I can't call it a fighter) with no afterburners, designed about 40 yrs ago, that relies almost completely on stealth with very limited ability to evade. If you can find it, or project where it's going to be, you can easily catch it and probably kill it. There's a reason they don't fly missions during the day. I was surprised that 1 didn't get killed with all the AA over Bahgdad on the initial strikes of both wars.

:grab

 

[Big-E]

Big-E wrote:


Reducing the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is the essence of Stealth. The F-22's RCS is very, very small - especially when compared to other previous generation fighters. But, that figure is not zero, it has a cross section there is something for radar to see from any angle, not much - but something. Since the quantity isn't zero, increasing the power of an illuminating radar will indeed assist detection. Power doesn't mean range, I realize it is more complicated than that, but more power does help.

High powered radars are such a thing of the past. All the new AESA systems are characterized by low voltage output. Higher power does not increase readable RCS especially if you don't have the software to sort through it. You might be able to pick up that marble sized blip but as far as your concerned it is just an atmospheric anomaly because your radar is so sensitive it picks up every stupid little thing. This is why our radars have become less power hungery because we know upping the voltage is a waste of time.

When the F-117 was downed in the Balkans, the AAA commander was creative and the USAF had become complacent == one downed expensive Stealth Fighter. This was precisely my poorly worded point. Stealth is not an invisibility shield, creative enemies and sloppy tactics result in unforeseen vulnerabilities.

If this is what you meant it was poorly worded indeed. You thought the static characteristics of the aircraft gave it a disadvantage to upcoming radars and ECs. I must point out the evolution of radar has about come to an end. New detection systems will be coming that do not include radar waves. As far as electronic countermeasures our 5th gen aircraft are fully upgradable to meet the threats of tommorow... you don't have to worry about that.

Back during the Cold War, the Russians maintained a series of acoustical detectors around probable paths of incoming NATO bombers and cruise missiles - called them "The Big Ear". I have heard they were capable enough to direct AAA fire.

nfloorl: ... nfloorl:... that was a good laugh! The next thing you'll tell me is Kolchuga actually picks up the F-22 on EMCON. :haha

It is impossible to predict technological breakthroughs. Yet, I find it easy to believe some emergent technology will eventually compromise stealth. Evidently the USAF thinks in a similar fashion, evidence - if the Raptor's stealth is immune to advances in radar then why invest so much development in making it super agile, super fast, a super fighter even without stealth? If the USAF's stealth technology was/is so "super", the F-22 could have been designed as a missile truck (a la Mig-25), a big, fast, stealthy flying missile farm.

There will be a new technology that defeats stealth but it won't have a thing to do with radar. They made the F-22 super fast to get to the battle quicker so she can conduct more missions. They made it super agile just in case someone visually sees it since it operates in the day unlike it's distant cousin the Nighthawk. They gave it all the bells and whistles so it can do all the missions... it's really not that hard to understand why they have faith in the concept... stealth will be relevant for quite some time.